file Mata Hari and kholo cards

07 Nov 2015 20:53 - 07 Nov 2015 20:56 #74136 by Boris The Blade
I don't think this is about Mata, it is about the Kholo cards.

For me, we have a card that is a Title card (it says so, with a keyword).

Problem is: per card text, you can have the card on without having the title. For example, if a kholo goes Anarch and there is no other eligible vampire, nothing says that card must burn, so he just keep it on without benefiting from the title, and the other effects are still active (i.e.: the first eligible vampire that comes out becomes the new Kholo). If you argue that the "title" keyword on the card is enough to cause Mata Hari's title to burn, then you open another can of worms, because it means that a kholo who goes anarch (and somehow keeps the card) is still a titled vampire for all relevant effects, and there are a lot of those.
Last edit: 07 Nov 2015 20:56 by Boris The Blade.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
08 Nov 2015 08:23 #74138 by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Re: Mata Hari and kholo cards
Kholo: "Put this card on this Laibon Akunanse to represent the unique Laibon title of Akunanse Kholo (worth 2 votes)."

Mata Hari plays it as a Laibon Akunanse and is considered a Laibon Akunanse for the resolution of the card, which is gaining this card that represents a new title. She loses her own title at that moment. After resolution, she's now longer a Laibon Akunanse, so the title becomes inert (unless it moves to another Akunanse of course).

Gaining the card is the same as gaining the title (that's why there's a "title" keyword).

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
08 Nov 2015 11:45 #74142 by Boris The Blade

Mata Hari plays it as a Laibon Akunanse and is considered a Laibon Akunanse for the resolution of the card, which is gaining this card that represents a new title. She loses her own title at that moment. After resolution, she's now longer a Laibon Akunanse, so the title becomes inert (unless it moves to another Akunanse of course).

If gaining the tile is part of resolution, then if a praxis burns for some reason, the vampire keeps his title? Do we agree that all effects on cards are either resolution effects or card-in-play effects (I hope I am not missing any stuff that triggers in the hand or ash heap?)

Gaining the card is the same as gaining the title (that's why there's a "title" keyword).

Source? The burden of proof is on you, because we already know that having the card is not the same as having the title: titles can go inert, and Kholo cards have more effects than granting a title, so the cards do not go "inert" when the title does.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
09 Nov 2015 06:12 - 09 Nov 2015 06:13 #74149 by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Re: Mata Hari and kholo cards

Mata Hari plays it as a Laibon Akunanse and is considered a Laibon Akunanse for the resolution of the card, which is gaining this card that represents a new title. She loses her own title at that moment. After resolution, she's now longer a Laibon Akunanse, so the title becomes inert (unless it moves to another Akunanse of course).

If gaining the tile is part of resolution, then if a praxis burns for some reason, the vampire keeps his title?

No, he or she doesn't.

Title: A Title card is a placeholder for a title. If the title is yielded or lost, the card is burned. If the title is unique, contests are paid with vampire blood, as normal for titles.


The card is the title: if the title is contested, the card is out of play too. If the card is burned, the title is lost. If the card moves (that is the case with the Kholo), the title moves too.

Do we agree that all effects on cards are either resolution effects or card-in-play effects (I hope I am not missing any stuff that triggers in the hand or ash heap?)

The question is too vague.
Gaining the Kholo card is the same as gaining the title.

Gaining the card is the same as gaining the title (that's why there's a "title" keyword).

Source? The burden of proof is on you, because we already know that having the card is not the same as having the title: titles can go inert, and Kholo cards have more effects than granting a title, so the cards do not go "inert" when the title does.

Source: the aforementioned rulebook section.
I don't know what "we know", but the card is a placeholder for the title. It has also additional effects, so what?

See also Regent in the Card Rulings section of this website.

Regent:
Regent is a title card, so it is out of play if the title is contested (and the built-in rush is not usable when the card is not in play). [LSJ 20070808]


Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Last edit: 09 Nov 2015 06:13 by Ankha.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.094 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum